I can see your point but should the women just give up, when there is still money wasted? As for your other point, the Prime Minister is on a lot less in terms remuneration! It would be interesting as to what councils have in terms of valuable paintings etc, some of which are stored away? I'm sure there was a TV programme on the subject.

I accept that cutting the bigger salaries will not cut the liability, it's simply the injustice. Hasn't it been said that executive pay is going up excessively whereas the ordinary workers are bearing the brunt of the downturn? You don't see too many executives marching in protest!

Anyhow, the legal wrangling will continue.

Are council salaries excessive? I've never looked into it to be honest, on the face of it they don't strike me as being to bad when compared to what those in the private sector earn for running similar sized organisations.

The prime ministers salary always seems to me to be a red hearing given what being in that job does to there future earning potential!

I'm not sure cutting the wages of those you deem to be over paid council execs and selling a few paintings is going to raise whats needed to settle past injustices. My concern would be that these liabilities will be settled to the detriment of those in the here and now and dare I say it when your cutting things like library services, sure start services etc etc to make up for budget short falls you’ll disproportionately discriminate against women who, certainly in my experience use these services far more than men.

There's something in this. My other half is a lawyer and not only is the above applicable but I'd also point out that the women in her firm work a damn sight harder than the men do, only to then disappear to have babies just at the time in their career when they'd be expecting to make partner (whether salaried or equity). Purely by dint of being the last ones left in the building the men then find themselves being made up. Nothing to do with talent or work ethic, more being in the right place at the right time.

Is that your missus making the observation that the women work harder than the men?

There is no doubt that having children does impinge on a person's career path. I don't think much can be done about this apart from offering both parents equal opportunities for leave and the option to share the burden as they see fit. I doubt many people that choose to have children are unaware that their career will suffer compared to if they haven't have had children.

I have a friend who was in a temporary management post before having a child and was then mightily peeved to learn that someone else had been given the permanent post on her return. I was surprised at her naivety.

Are council salaries excessive? I've never looked into it to be honest, on the face of it they don't strike me as being to bad when compared to what those in the private sector earn for running similar sized organisations.

The prime ministers salary always seems to me to be a red hearing given what being in that job does to there future earning potential!

I'm not sure cutting the wages of those you deem to be over paid council execs and selling a few paintings is going to raise whats needed to settle past injustices. My concern would be that these liabilities will be settled to the detriment of those in the here and now and dare I say it when your cutting things like library services, sure start services etc etc to make up for budget short falls you’ll disproportionately discriminate against women who, certainly in my experience use these services far more than men.

It's debatable but still causes much controversial headlines. With regard to women giving up on their attempts for justice given the amount it would take to settle in times of austerity, how do you see the situation as to how Local Authorities are going to continue to foot the bill for superannuation, without increased contributions and less benefits? Just like the women who were underpaid, the employees working for Local Authorities are certainly up in arms.

As for my thread, women have improved their lot since winning the right to vote, but there are still those who oppose them from getting on in life.

On the face of it it strikes me as a good idea, but wonder how much consultation is done with those effected, would women by happy to share there maternity leave with a partner? Might it open some up to pressure to return to work early, when infact they'd prefer to use the 12 months themselves?

In Denmark mothers still take the bulk of the parental leave, but the proportion taken by men is steadily rising.

As for the second point, maybe some women would be under pressure to go back early, but you can't have your cake and eat it. If women want equality then they have to take the downsides as well.

It was just to the fact that councils cannot cry poverty to deny women what is rightfully due yet still pay huge salaries that continue to be criticised under the prevalent climate.

The problem, as I understand it, with many of the legal actions that are being taken against councils on this is that the jobs are not like for like. There are a lot of dinner ladies who feel they should have been paid the same as binmen, and would like to see the money now. But a dinner lady is not a binman.

Binmen and binwomen should be paid the same. As should dinnerladies and dinnermen. But there's no reason why dinnerladies should be paid the same as binmen. Different jobs, different money.

There is no doubt that having children does impinge on a person's career path. I don't think much can be done about this apart from offering both parents equal opportunities for leave and the option to share the burden as they see fit. I doubt many people that choose to have children are unaware that their career will suffer compared to if they haven't have had children.

I'm pretty cool with the career hit TBH.

We're struggling because both Wendy and I have demanding jobs. We're just about okay as long as nothing goes wrong. But when little one gets a cold and is at home, we're stuffed. There's no contingency in our lives. No spare capacity.

We did a quick audit of all our friends with kids. All the people we know with any kind of permanent, difficult, full time job, have their other half either at home all the time or in a part time job. An example would be my best mate, who is a patent lawyer - a tough, demanding job with long hours. His wife works in an art gallery two days a week and does the bulk of the child care.

The only way one of you won't take a big career hit is if the other looks after the kids or you get help in. I can't see anyway to make it work.

The only couple I know where both are doing a serious job (as in Director of BT type serious job), have a nanny, which seems to me to be a stupid way to bring up your kids. Personally, I think I may have to quit fairly soon and be a full time dad. I could cope very happily with that.

The last point I would make is, for all various governments and moral high horse idiots like to tell single mothers that they are root of all evil, I think that anyone who brings up a half decent kid on their own must be some kind of miracle worker and deserves respect not scorn.

The problem is that there are many differing scenarios when it comes to work. IMO you cannot simply say 'women get paid the same as men full stop' due to differing environments.

If, a man and a woman are doing exactly the same job and both doing roles of equal responsibility, then logically they should get the same. But say for instance a man and a woman got a job as brickies labourers, the woman shouldn't expect the bloke to do all the physical lifting or hod carrying while she swept up and made tea (not sexist, men have to do this on building sites) and expect the same rate of pay. Or if they do get the same rate the bloke should let her do her share. OK, that's not too likely a scenario at present but the principle will become a bigger issue in years to come I believe. There are only so many lawyer or exec jobs to go round and someone is going to have to do the sh! t shovelling jobs and it will become an issue if some women think they can be excused the heavy, dirty work.

Equal pay for the same job? Absolutely Equal pay regardless of job or scenario? No

The problem, as I understand it, with many of the legal actions that are being taken against councils on this is that the jobs are not like for like. There are a lot of dinner ladies who feel they should have been paid the same as binmen, and would like to see the money now. But a dinner lady is not a binman.

Binmen and binwomen should be paid the same. As should dinnerladies and dinnermen. But there's no reason why dinnerladies should be paid the same as binmen. Different jobs, different money.

This is an interesting point of view. A binman's/binwomen's job is very demanding out in all weathers. My good wife used to walk round the village in all weathers and in the dark whilst doing her job as a community worker, with her job entailing wiping people's backsides, bathing and dressing them, giving medication, as well as dealing with very heavy people. Not forgetting the physical and verbal abuse dished out from difficult clients. How do you quantify like for like?

This is an interesting point of view. A binman's/binwomen's job is very demanding out in all weathers. My good wife used to walk round the village in all weathers and in the dark whilst doing her job as a community worker, with her job entailing wiping people's backsides, bathing and dressing them, giving medication, as well as dealing with very heavy people. Not forgetting the physical and verbal abuse dished out from difficult clients. How do you quantify like for like?

Not sure what point you are trying to make. If a man was doing the same job your wife was than they should be getting the same pay. If someone else does a different job, then they may not get the same pay.

Not sure what point you are trying to make. If a man was doing the same job your wife was than they should be getting the same pay. If someone else does a different job, then they may not get the same pay.

The binmen were on more money but was their job more demanding than that of a community worker?

I don't know. If your wife felt it was, why didn't she become a binman?

The answer is that the jobs are not really comparable, which undermines the whole case.

The cases have been won though. Very occasionally it's the other way round - there was a small group of men who got an award for being underpaid relative to women doing a different job reckoned now to be on the same level.

Is that your missus making the observation that the women work harder than the men?

There is no doubt that having children does impinge on a person's career path. I don't think much can be done about this apart from offering both parents equal opportunities for leave and the option to share the burden as they see fit. I doubt many people that choose to have children are unaware that their career will suffer compared to if they haven't have had children.

I have a friend who was in a temporary management post before having a child and was then mightily peeved to learn that someone else had been given the permanent post on her return. I was surprised at her naivety.

Yes it is her assertion. But then I'd back it up by saying I've seen the same in my own employment. Generalisation of course but I'd say that, although doing the same hours, women tend to get more done in that time.

Not that it bothers us because we don't have kids or intend to have any.

Edited by nadera78, 22 November 2012 - 01:03 PM.

"Just as we had been Cathars, we were treizistes, men apart."
Jean Roque, Calendrier-revue du Racing-Club Albigeois, 1958-1959

I think that the inequality is more of an expectation. It is still thought, in many cases that the brunt of child care is the woman's domain. Employers still think woman with children will be off more than men with children. Until that social issue is addressed there will be inequality.

I also think that being a carer for children and male is subject to so many issues that need addressing and that will probaly be the first step.

I also think that being a carer for children and male is subject to so many issues that need addressing and that will probaly be the first step.

There is a general assumption that it will be women who are doing the caring. The local soft play has "mums and toddlers" groups but never a "dads and toddlers" or even a "parents and toddlers" group for example.

I go along to it sometimes, and am usually the only male over the age of three. Sadly, it is not at all like "About a Boy" and I haven't yet met anyone who looks like Rachel Weisz.

Noone seems to mind that I'm there, but a lot of the discussions are about things I just don't care about (eg breastfeeding) or simply would rather not know about (eg episiotomies). I tend to play with my little one in the ball pool or whatever and leave the women to get on with it.

Thankfully, the days of changing facilities only being in the ladies seem to be largely over. On the odd occasion when I've been caught out by that I've just gone into the ladies loos and got on with it. Noone has ever complained, and if they did I'd tell them to get lost.

There are issues, but I tend to think they're minor compared with the benefits of looking after the little one personally. If a bit of stick and some career trouble stopped me being a father, what kind of father would I be?